The National  Memo Logo

Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

Acting U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor testified to Congress on Tuesday that he was directly told that military aid to Ukraine was being delayed by President Donald Trump in order to pressure the country to open investigations into Democrats, the Washington Post reported.

Taylor’s testimony in the impeachment inquiry had been hotly anticipated since texts between him and other State Department officials were revealed showing that he had earlier warned about such a quid pro quo, calling it “crazy.”

In his testimony, Taylor reportedly said that he stood by his texts, in which he wrote, “As I said on the phone, I think it’s crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign.”

After that text to Ambassador to the EU Gordon Sondland, there was nearly a five-hour gap. Then Sondland replied by saying Trump had claimed there was no quid pro quo. Sondland has since reportedly testified that he wasn’t sure if this was true, only that Trump claimed it was true.

But according to the Post, Taylor said Sondland was explicit about the quid pro quo in a phone conversation:

“Amb. Sondland also told me that he now recognized that he had made a mistake by earlier telling the Ukrainian officials to whom he spoke that a White House meeting with President Zelensky was dependent on a public announcement of investigations — in fact, Amb. Sondland said, ‘everything’ was dependent on such an announcement, including security assistance,’” Taylor told House investigators.

“He said that President Trump wanted President Zelensky ‘in a public box’ by making a public statement about ordering such investigations.’

Start your day with National Memo Newsletter

Know first.

The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, left, and former President Donald Trump.

Photo by Kevin McCarthy (Public domain)

In the professional stratum of politics, few verities are treated with more reverence than the outcome of next year's midterm, when the Republican Party is deemed certain to recapture majorities in the House and Senate. With weary wisdom, any pol or pundit will cite the long string of elections that buttress this prediction.

Political history also tells us that many factors can influence an electoral result, including a national crisis or a change in economic conditions — in other words, things can change and even midterm elections are not entirely foretold. There have been a few exceptions to this rule, too.

Keep reading... Show less
x

Close